In 1644 Rev. Samuel Rutherford published LEX, REX, The Law & the Prince to demonstrate that the natural law is above the King, Some 364 years later The Invisible Hand Blog is born after a historic election a Reagan Conservative born in the 60's molded in the Reagan years begins this blog to demonstrate the God given Unalienable rights given to every person by God. God bless the truth and let the truth be raised.

December 03, 2008

Donofrio v. Wells No.08A407 has been distributed and is scheduled for conference on December 5, 2008, thanks to Justice Clarence Thomas. The U.S. Supreme Court scheduling docket for No.08A407

shows the history of the writ of certiorari of Donofrio v. Wells. Justice Thomas has asked his colleagues to consider the lawsuit challenging President-elect Obama's status as a United States citizen.

Thomas action took place after the presiding Justice over the New Jersey district had rejected the petition known as an application for a stay of writ of certiorari that asked the court to prevent the Electoral College on December 15, 2008, which will certify Obama as the 44th president of the United States.

Thomas's actions were rare because, by custom, when a justice rejects a petition from his own circuit, like Justice Souter did in this case, the matter is dead. Even if, as can be the case under Rule 22 the matter can be submitted to another justice for consideration, that justice out of respect, will reject it also. Trevor Morrison, a professor of law at Columbia University School of Law, said that "Thomas's actions are once in a decade." "When that does happen the case has to be of an extraordinary nature and this does not fit that circumstance." Read the Full Story.

What will it take for the Justices to docket this cause and hear oral arguments? The RULE OF FOUR, four of the nine justices must agree to hear this case, if four of the justice agree then the case will be heard. Donofrio v. Wells, the lawyer turned "citizen advocate is not questioning Obama's birth certificate, but rather his citizenship, in fact the Kansas City Star in todays A-1 front page article mistakenly stated that this action dealt with Obama's birth certificate, that is not the case as Donofrio states that Obama was born in Hawaii, that is not the issue in this action. You may read more at Donofrio's blog naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com

Now this is not the only lawsuit in the courts, yes there are more, many more, concerning Obama's Birth Certificate, Natural Born, citizenship, etc. For a review you can check out this article from the New American. READ FULL STORY.

On December 1, 2008 & again today December 3, 2008, WE THE PEOPLE FOUNDATION in a full page ad displayed the following open letter to Barack Obama in Obama's back yard the Chicago Tribune:

Representing thousands of responsible American citizens who have also taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic, I am duty bound to call on you to remedy an apparent violation of the Constitution.

Compelling evidence supports the claim that you are barred from holding the Office of President by the “natural born citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution. For instance:

Your father was a Kenyan citizen at the time of your birth and your mother was 18.

Legal affidavits state you were born in Kenya.

Your grandmother is recorded on tape saying she attended your birth in Kenya.

Hawaii Dept of Health will not confirm your assertion that you were born in Hawaii.

You have posted an unsigned, computer-generated birth form that was created in 2007, a form that lacks vital information found on an original, hand signed Certificate of Live Birth, such as hospital address, signature of attending physician and age of mother.

U.S. Law in 1961 denied U.S. citizenship to any child born in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19 years of age.

In 1965, your mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or U.S. citizenship she and you had by marrying an Indonesian and becoming a naturalized Indonesian citizen.

You have repeatedly refused to provide evidence of your eligibility when challenged to do so in a number of recent lawsuits. Instead, you have been successful in having judges declare that they are powerless to order you to prove your eligibility to assume the Office of President.

For instance, the judge in Pennsylvania ruled the challenger had no standing to question your eligibility because his harm would be no different from the harm to be suffered by all other American citizens if you, as an ineligible person were to assume the Presidency. The judge in Hawaii actually said it would be an invasion of your privacy for him to order access to your original birth certificate in order to prove youreligibility to hold the Office of President.

Before you can legitimately exercise any of the powers of the President you must meet all the criteria for eligibility established by the Constitution. You are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence. Should you assume the office as anyone but a bona fide natural born citizen of the United States who hasnot relinquished that citizenship, you would be inviting a national crisis that would undermine the domestic peace and stability of the Nation. For example:

You would always be viewed by many Americans as a poseur - a usurper.

As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required “Oath or Affirmation” on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States.

You would be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from the People.

The armed forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you.

No civilian in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, executive orders or directives, as such orders would be legally void.

Your appointments of Ambassadors and Judges to the Supreme Court would be void no matter what subsequent actions the Senate might take.

Congress would not be able to pass new laws because it would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President.

As a usurper, Congress would be unable to remove you from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper.

In consideration of the escalating constitutional crisis brought on by the total lack of evidence needed to conclusively establish your eligibility, I am compelled to lodge a First Amendment Petition for a Redress of this constitutional tort.

With all due respect, I ask that you immediately direct the appropriate Hawaiian officials to allow access to the vault copy of your birth certificate by our forensic scientists on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, December 5, 6 and 7, 2008.

In addition, I ask that you to arrange to have the following documentary evidence delivered to the National Press Club by 10 am on December 8, 2008.

a certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity.

certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School.

certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing your name from Barry Soetoro.

“In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Robert L. SchulzChairman

We The People Foundation

For Constitutional Education, Inc.

www.WeThePeopleFoundation.org

2458 Ridge Road Queensbury, NY 12804info@givemeliberty.org

Here is my clear and practical legal analysis on the question of whether Obama is or is not a natural born citizen of the United States of America. As a criminal defense attorney, if my clients are guilty they will hide and conceal the truth as long as they are able. Mr. Obama reminds me of some of my clients, if you are innocent expose the evidence, reveal the truth, if you are guilty conceal, hide, & deny. Here Obama has continued to conceal, hide, & deny. He continues to conceal his original Birth Certificate, his college records, and his law school records. If he was actually a natural born citizen would he not want to readily prove this, instead of making this a issue that may or may not be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

So what does this mean? Obama is hiding or trying to conceal something, I do not know what it is, but this is the typical behavior of someone who does not want the truth revealed, whatever that is? However, the end result is this, the electoral college will convene on December 15, 2008, President-elect will be certified as the 44th president of the United States of America. On January 20, 2009 at 12:00 noon, Mr. Obama will place his left hand on the Bible and will be sworn in as the 44th President. President Obama will swear to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, and he will occupy the White House as the President at least for four years.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Folks, this is NOT rocket science.

Since the Constitution’s Article II requires our President to be a “natural born citizen” (not merely a “citizen” as allowed for those living when the Constitution was enacted), meaning both parents were US “citizens” when the child was born (altho parents need not be “natural born” citizens), there’s NO WAY Obama can be President — regardless of being born in Kenya OR Hawaii — that is, to be “natural born citizen” (as opposed to being a “citizen”) being born on American soil is insufficient unless both parents are “citizens”. Obama’s dad was NOT an American citizen. He was a citizen of the UK (administering Kenya at the time).

Bottom line, the questions of (1) the birth certificate, (2) where Obama was born, and (3) whether Obama was a “citizen” of the US, all miss the mark. The issue before the Supreme Court is “natural born citizen” of the US, NOT “citizen” of the US. Under the Constitution, a Senator or House Member, for example, need only be a “citizen”, but a President, uniquely, must be a “natural born citizen”.